MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965937115 · doi:10.1071/mf06069

Age under-estimation in New Zealand porbeagle sharks (Lamna nasus): is there an upper limit to ages that can be determined from shark vertebrae?

2007· article· en· W1965937115 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine and Freshwater Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of Oceanography
FundersWoods Hole Oceanographic InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSexual maturityBiologyAnatomyZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annual deposition of growth bands in vertebrae has been validated for many shark species, and is now widely regarded as the norm. However, vertebrae are part of the shark’s axial skeleton, and band deposition may stop in old sharks when somatic growth ceases. We aged vertebral sections from New Zealand porbeagle sharks (Lamna nasus) under reflected white light and using X-radiographs. Bomb radiocarbon assays supported vertebral age estimates up to ~20 years, but not at older ages. The results suggest that older porbeagles were under-aged by as much as 50% from vertebral band counts, presumably because band width declined to a point where it became unresolvable. This has important implications for growth studies on other long-lived sharks. Estimated ages at sexual maturity were 8–11 years for males and 15–18 years for females, and longevity may be ~65 years. New Zealand and North Atlantic porbeagles differ in these parameters, and in length at maturity and maximum length, suggesting genetic isolation of the two populations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it